beta
Text
The Defendants jointly share the Plaintiff A with KRW 2,070,863, KRW 1,940,402, and KRW 2,457,592, respectively.
Reasons
Basic Facts
The following facts are not disputed between the parties:
Plaintiff
A is the owner and driver of FSP car (hereinafter referred to as "Plaintiff vehicle"), and Plaintiff B and G are their parents.
Defendant D is the driver of Hpoter truck (hereinafter referred to as “Defendant vehicle”), and Defendant E is the owner of the Defendant vehicle.
The non-party fire insurance company (hereinafter referred to as the "Dong fire") is an insurer who has entered into an automobile insurance contract for the defendant's vehicle.
On January 26, 2013: (a) around 13:15, 13:15, the Plaintiff’s vehicle at the intersection of the 70 bathing beach zone (hereinafter “instant intersection”) from the side of the public parking lot (Im) in the case of the Plaintiff’s vehicle; (b) while the Defendant’s vehicle proceeding to the spare from the edge of the new square, there was an accident that conflicts between the front side of the Plaintiff’s vehicle’s right and the rear side of the Defendant’s vehicle at the center of the intersection.
(hereinafter “the instant accident”). At the time of the instant accident, the signal and road status of the instant intersection were the first line with the direction of the Plaintiff’s vehicle driving direction, the second line with the red on-and-off signal and the second line with the direction of the Defendant’s vehicle driving.
The plaintiffs' assertion of the parties as to the occurrence of the accident of this case as to the occurrence of the accident of this case, after entering the intersection of this case, the defendant vehicle was found late due to the violation of the duty of front-way display and the duty of front-way display, etc. and found the plaintiff vehicle immediately and proceeded on the left-hand side and right-hand side of the defendant vehicle, which is the right-hand side of the plaintiff vehicle.
The Defendants’ vehicle entered the instant intersection and proceeded with a considerable portion, and the Plaintiff’s vehicle entered the instant intersection while violating the duty of temporary suspension and the duty of full-time display, etc., and subsequently, the front part of the Plaintiff’s vehicle was shocked in front of the right side.